An immigration judge has dismissed the Trump administration’s attempt to deport a Tufts University PhD student targeted for her pro-Palestinian speech, delivering a significant legal setback to
federal efforts aimed at foreign student activists.
Rumeysa Ozturk, a Turkish national and doctoral student at Tufts, was arrested by immigration authorities last year after the U.S. State Department revoked her student visa. The government cited a single reason for the revocation: an opinion piece she co-wrote in her university’s student newspaper criticizing Tufts’ response to Israel’s war in Gaza.
On January 29, Immigration Judge Roopal Patel ruled that the Department of Homeland Security failed to prove Ozturk was legally removable from the United States. As a result, the judge terminated the deportation proceedings, according to court filings submitted Monday by Ozturk’s attorneys to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
The ruling effectively ends—for now—a case that has drawn national attention and raised serious concerns among civil liberties advocates about free speech protections for non-citizen students.
“This decision allows me to breathe again,” Ozturk said in a statement. “Despite the flaws in the justice system, I hope my case offers reassurance to others who have been wronged by the U.S. government.”
Ozturk was taken into custody in March after immigration agents detained her on a street in Somerville, Massachusetts. Video of the arrest quickly spread online, turning her case into one of the most visible examples of the Trump administration’s broader campaign to deport international students involved in pro-Palestinian campus activism.
Her legal team, which includes attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union, argued that the government’s actions violated basic First Amendment principles by punishing political expression. The immigration judge’s decision itself has not been made public, but DHS retains the option to appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals within the Department of Justice.
In a statement, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security criticized the ruling, calling it an example of “judicial activism.” The spokesperson added that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has warned that individuals should not expect to “hide behind the First Amendment” to promote what the administration characterizes as “anti-American and anti-Semitic violence and terrorism.”
Ozturk, a child development researcher, has denied any such allegations. Her lawyers maintain that the government never presented evidence beyond the student editorial to justify revoking her visa or seeking her removal.
Legal experts say the case underscores growing tensions between immigration enforcement and constitutional protections, particularly as universities remain flashpoints for political debate over the Gaza conflict.
While the administration may still pursue an appeal, the judge’s decision represents a notable victory for Ozturk—and for advocates who argue that political speech alone should never be grounds for deportation. Photo by HereToHelp, Wikimedia commons.